Interim Report - Report No 226, June 1983

Case No 1110 (Thailand) - Complaint date: 26-JAN-82 - Closed

1. 181. The World Confederation of Labour (WCL) presented its complaint alleging the violation of trade union rights in Thailand in an initial communication dated 26 January 1982. It subsequently sent additional information in support of its complaint in a letter dated 27 May 1982. The Government forwarded certain information and observations in communications dated 27 July 1982 and 23 March 1983.
2. 182. Thailand has not ratified either the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention, 1948 (No. 87), or the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949 (No. 98).

A. The complainant's allegations

1. 183. In its communication dated 26 January 1982 the WCL states that an affiliated organisation, the Brotherhood of Asian. Trade Unionists (BATU), informed it that on 14 October 1981 three trade union leaders of the Saha Farm Labour Union were shot in Bangkok and that two were dead and the third injured. The complainant adds that, prior to the shooting, they were ordered by the company to leave their factory jobs for the simple reason that the management wanted to eradicate the labour movement in the company.
2. 184. The complainant requests the ILO to use its good offices to invite the Government of Thailand to respect the principle of freedom of association and to protect the workers' trade union rights within the enterprises. It also requests that the Government take legal action against the management of the Saha Farm Company Limited for its inhuman act and hostile attitude vis-à-vis the workers and their unions and seek out the assassins and their accomplices so that they can be tried in court.
3. 185. In its latest communication dated 27 May 1982, the WCL submits the following additional information: The Saha Farm Company Limited is a chicken farm raising poultry for export, with 630 employees working at night from 8.00 p.m. to 11.00 a.m. The employees are paid less than the official minimum wage, declared by the Government of Thailand, which was increased from 54 to 61 bahts in October 1981. In. view of their poor working and living conditions, the workers have organised themselves into a union and joined the National Congress of Thai Labour, which is affiliated to the WCL. The union submitted a list of grievances to the company, but the management refused to negotiate. The union's action displeased the owner of the company who set out to stifle the labour movement in its embryo. The management dismissed the leaders of the union and the case was referred to the Labour Relations Committee. On the night of the same day, 14 October 1981, two of the leaders, Samrong Napashote and Son Kitjawart, were shot dead and a third, Somsak Boonsomphong, was injured. According to the complainant, the local police were able to arrest two persons near the company on 9 December 1981, but the latter denied their involvement.

B. The Government's reply

1. 186. In an initial reply dated 27 July 1982, the Government stated that an inquiry was being conducted by of the police and that it could not yet be concluded whether the crime against the employees of the Saha Farm Company limited was committed by the employer. It observed that, if the incident originated out of a dispute or conflict between the victims and third persons without the involvement of the employer, the case could hardly be considered an infringement of trade union rights. Nevertheless, as the court was in the process of cross-examining the plaintiff's witnesses, the Government's final observations on the case would have to await the outcome of the trial.
2. 187. In a communication dated 23 March 1983, the Government explains that, on 13 December 1982, the Thai Criminal Court passed a death sentence on the two accused, Prasutr Pianetr and Payao Ketkhuanq, who were found guilty of murder. The Court found that the accused had received payment from the owners of the Saha Farm Company Limited to murder Samrong Napashote and Son Kitjawart, as they were displeased with the victims' leading role in the establishment of a trade union so as to demand from the company an increase in wages to meet higher costs of living, as well as other improvements in the welfare of the workers.

C. The Committee's conclusions

1. 188. In the first place the Committee deeply deplores the murder of the trade union leaders Samrong Napashote and Son Kitjawart, which was committed by assassins hired by the owners of the Saha Farm Company Limited who were displeased with the victims, leading role in the establishment of a trade union so as to demand from the company an increase in higher wages to meet higher costs of living, as well as other improvements in the welfare of the workers. The Committee must express its indignation at these events which should call for extremely severe measures also being taken against the employers who were originally responsible for them.
2. 189. The Committee notes that, according to the information submitted by the Government, the perpetrators of the crime have been punished according to the law.
3. 190. Nevertheless, in view of the fact that, in the Government's own words, the crime was paid for by the owners of Saha Farm Company Limited to prevent the establishment of a trade union movement in their undertaking, the Committee strongly urges the Government to supply information on the legal proceedings instituted against the owners of the Saha Farm Company Limited and to communicate the text of any judgement handed down against them.

The Committee's recommendations

1. 191. In these circumstances, the Committee recommends the Governing Body to approve this interim report and, in particular, the following conclusions:
   • (a) The Committee deeply deplores the murder of the trade union leaders Samrong Napashote and Son Kitjawart; the Committee expresses its indignation at the events which should call for extremely severe measures also being taken against the employers who were originally responsible for them.
   • (b) while noting that the perpetrators of the crime have been punished according to the law, the Committee observes that, in the Government's own words, the murder was paid for by the owners of the Saha Farm Company Limited to prevent the establishment of a trade union movement in their undertaking. The Committee therefore strongly urges the Government to supply information on the legal proceedings instituted against the owners of Saha Farm Company limited and to communicate the text of any judgement handed down against them.